Or maybe draw up a list of Islamic militants and post it. Oh, they won't? Why is that then? A bit scared of what might happen? Boo hoo.
Typical 21st century armchair warriors, pick on easy targets and make it look like you're a hero Sticking It To The Man when you know you're really living in a comfy democracy where nothing particularly bad is going to happen to you. Try doing the same in various other countries around the world and see how long it is before someone kicks down your door at 3am and your family never see you again.
Yet here you are, in your armchair picking safe fights with people on a harmless Internet forum. Bravo.
The funny thing about peak oil, is that the concept is still correct even if the timing is wrong. We've heard the rebuttals "oh they said that 20 years ago". Sure peak oil might not be this year or next, or even int he next decade or two. But conceptually it has to happen at some point, so the sooner we deal with it the better (and cheaper and easier) it will be.
Those economic interests are only bigger while millions of people aren't dying in the streets. Sooner or later CO2 control will become the biggest economic interest there is.
As I said, there's plenty of such cases where one person or event contributed to the result. Had one of Hitler's officers not moved Stauffenberg briefcase bomb a few centremetres at Wolf's Lair then the war would've ended a year early, and there probably would've not been 50 years of Cold War, Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden, 9/11, the Iraq war, or ISIS.
Crazy to think how much different the world would've been had that one guy looked the other way for a few seconds.
Yeah your Shamen analogy falls over since most people don't spontaneously die (and don't believe the stories you read on the internet, I'm yet to see scientific evidence to support such bunk). It also falls apart with just one non-believer who tells the Shamen to go fuck himself.
For money it takes more than just one person to cause it to fail, you need almost everyone to not believe. And since greed is intrinsic in all living things, good luck with that.
No. A theism means without a belief in a god. That doesn't exclude other myths an atheist might believe in.
Yes but those other beliefs are not part of the label that goes with Atheism. It doesn't exclude it, but doesn't include it either.
The difference with religion is that other myths don't get special treatment in the eyes of the law, so no-one really cares as much. Why Religion does I still don't understand.
That's the trick right, finding a woman experienced enough to know what she's doing but not too far gone that she's falling apart. So far I've found late 30's/early 40's is the sweet spot:)
It's based on statistics I presented in earlier comments but I guess you already forgot because you have no faith in anybody else than yourself.
No it isn't, I just gave you example of where that isn't the case. Please explain specifically what statistics are used to impose a 40km/h school zone 24 hours a day/7 days a week on a formerly zoned 70km/h stretch of road? your 85th percentile was used to get the 70km/h zone, emotion was used to reduce this to 40 even at 3am on Sunday morning when all the kiddies are in bed.
I would suggest you start working on your campaign since your government obviously suck and you have so much to offer (I'm not being offensive but rather honest. You should if it's that bad where you live)!
Prove it.
I just debunked your science claim with an example above, but you seem to want to close your eyes to that.
I sent you many links showing the studies made to assess speed limit requirements. You're assuming your peers (other human beings) aren't doing their due diligence and that's a very poor argument. Just to recap 2 of the many metrics used:
1. The 85th percentile is one of the metrics used to assess compliance
2. Fatalities and injuries are used for assessing if the change is effective
I'm not assuming, as I said I have experience in this area. I choose not to disclose details in a public forum, but just accept that I have a little more insight to this than you're assuming. Sometimes the Engineers are listened to, a lot of the time they aren't.
While I feel for the family, to say that he is not overweight shows just how much society's perception of being overweight has changed.
I remember teasing fat kids at school back in the 80s. In a school of 1800 kids there were about 4 fat kids, and by fat I mean not slim. These days it seems everyone is fat and you have to be morbidly obese to stand out. Even on TV where it was the domain of the slim and beautiful, it is now ok for people to be fat. You don't really notice how normalised it has become until you go away to a non-western country and time warp back to the 80's, then come back and look in shock at an entire nation of fat fucks.
In fact, in the US, increases in gun ownership and sales have correlated with decreases in murder rate.
I haven't seen the numbers, but I'd been willing to bet that crime is reducing overall due to increased prosperity in the developed world. The fact still remains, the US gun death rate is still of third world proportions, and just as much to do with the extreme gap between rich and poor which not as obvious as other developed nations.
Why do people always look to "gun-related" murder stats as though being murdered by a gun is somehow worse than being murdered by other means.
Because the argument is usually related to gun crime and gun control. Guns tend to allow more random and accidental murders, whereas other means require a bit more planning.
Higher, yes, but when you look at regions with analogous geographic sizes, populations, and cultural variations, the numbers don't express any ludicrously high differences.
Europe is far more varied than the US. You're including countries like Russia and the Ukraine which are at war. Hardly a fair comparison, it'd be like including Mexico in the US figures. Even then, with your figures the US is still over 50% higher.
When you compare the developed nations of Western Europe with the US, the numbers are not even close.
I was taught that a wounded animal is more dangerous than one that is not. There are people who are greatly offended (wounded) by the mockery of their strongly held beliefs. Why keep poking them with a stick and acting surprised when they strike back?
Yeah we should just submit to their demands. It's worth noting there's about 1.2 billion Muslims on this planet, most of whom didn't give the Mohammed drawings a second thought (well other than, hey that's disrespectful - what's for lunch today?). The only people getting upset are extremists, and they will always find a reason to be angry. The best path is to keep repeating these exercises until the extremists wake up and think hey this isn't so bad after all - whats for lunch? It's quite hard to stay angry for long periods of time. If you can normalise the object of anger, and demonstrate it isn't such a big deal after all, you find it hard for extremists to recruit for their cause. ( Think racism, homophobia etc all had lots of angry people against it that have now mostly evaporated when they realised the sky didn't fall on their heads)
I just looked this up for the first and laughed out loud. What the fuck are police doing dressing up like they're commandos? They even went as far as full face paint? Who are they hiding from? What a bunch of dickheads...
Only if you discard the time dimension. Christians spent hundreds of years imposing terrorism on the world. Just because their religion is a few hundred years older and hence a little more mature these days doesn't mean it didn't happen. Islam is merely going through the same growing pains that Christianity went through a during the inquisition and witch hunt days.
Or do you want to ignore the fact of the low murder rate in easy to legally get a gun Plano, Texas (.4 per 100,000) and the highest murder rate in the hard to legally get a gun city of Detroit (54.6 per 100,000)?
Gun laws are state-wide aren't they? And last I checked people are able to move between towns without any sort of border control. Seems awfully selective to chose one town to demonstrate a point.
Using you own example, Texas has a gun death rate 3.2 per 100,000 which is still 13 times higher than the UK.
I'm afraid such crimes are not uniformly distributed across the country as your stats attempt to portray, and if you exclude a few notable locations which disproportionally have rather high numbers, the national average begins to drop quickly.
Yeah but everyone can say that. Take the mean streets of the London's East End out and things look better there too. The example of law must be demonstrated using the political boundary, not cherry picking areas that suit. The lowest gun death state in the US is Vermont which is still 20% higher than the UK. And pretty much higher than the top 30 countries in the world. In no case does more guns mean less guns deaths. In fact the opposite is generally true
What utter horseshit. what if you're poor and can't afford the safer area? You can't defend yourself because you work a menial job, or went into bankruptcy after a major medical condition. Guns are the great equalizer and everyone deserves to have them and defend themselves.
No the great equaliser is creating a society where you don't need weapons to get by, you know like all the places in the world that have higher standards of living than the US: http://www.businessinsider.com...
Please enlighten me as to which shining new law that doesn't currently exist would stop the next senseless gun death.
Exactly which law including banning firearms will keep them out of the hands of criminals.
Please feel free to succeed where countless politicians and anti-gun lobbyists have failed.
Perhaps you should look outside the US where every country in the western world has stricter gun control laws AND much less gun deaths? The success pattern is quite clear.
I'm not against guns, I grew up in a rural community where guns were tools used by people to perform a task (hunt wild animals and euthanise injured stock). The issue is more than just guns or no guns, but the US seems to have developed a "gun culture" which has leeched into the national psyche. Guns seem to be primarily treated as weapons and security blankets. That needs to be fixed before any effective regulation can be brought into place.
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe draw up a list of Islamic militants and post it. Oh, they won't? Why is that then? A bit scared of what might happen? Boo hoo.
Typical 21st century armchair warriors, pick on easy targets and make it look like you're a hero Sticking It To The Man when you know you're really living in a comfy democracy where nothing particularly bad is going to happen to you. Try doing the same in various other countries around the world and see how long it is before someone kicks down your door at 3am and your family never see you again.
Yet here you are, in your armchair picking safe fights with people on a harmless Internet forum. Bravo.
The funny thing about peak oil, is that the concept is still correct even if the timing is wrong. We've heard the rebuttals "oh they said that 20 years ago". Sure peak oil might not be this year or next, or even int he next decade or two. But conceptually it has to happen at some point, so the sooner we deal with it the better (and cheaper and easier) it will be.
Those economic interests are only bigger while millions of people aren't dying in the streets. Sooner or later CO2 control will become the biggest economic interest there is.
As I said, there's plenty of such cases where one person or event contributed to the result. Had one of Hitler's officers not moved Stauffenberg briefcase bomb a few centremetres at Wolf's Lair then the war would've ended a year early, and there probably would've not been 50 years of Cold War, Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden, 9/11, the Iraq war, or ISIS.
Crazy to think how much different the world would've been had that one guy looked the other way for a few seconds.
Yeah your Shamen analogy falls over since most people don't spontaneously die (and don't believe the stories you read on the internet, I'm yet to see scientific evidence to support such bunk). It also falls apart with just one non-believer who tells the Shamen to go fuck himself.
For money it takes more than just one person to cause it to fail, you need almost everyone to not believe. And since greed is intrinsic in all living things, good luck with that.
No. A theism means without a belief in a god. That doesn't exclude other myths an atheist might believe in.
Yes but those other beliefs are not part of the label that goes with Atheism. It doesn't exclude it, but doesn't include it either.
The difference with religion is that other myths don't get special treatment in the eyes of the law, so no-one really cares as much. Why Religion does I still don't understand.
That's the trick right, finding a woman experienced enough to know what she's doing but not too far gone that she's falling apart. So far I've found late 30's/early 40's is the sweet spot :)
It's based on statistics I presented in earlier comments but I guess you already forgot because you have no faith in anybody else than yourself.
No it isn't, I just gave you example of where that isn't the case. Please explain specifically what statistics are used to impose a 40km/h school zone 24 hours a day/7 days a week on a formerly zoned 70km/h stretch of road? your 85th percentile was used to get the 70km/h zone, emotion was used to reduce this to 40 even at 3am on Sunday morning when all the kiddies are in bed. I would suggest you start working on your campaign since your government obviously suck and you have so much to offer (I'm not being offensive but rather honest. You should if it's that bad where you live)!
Prove it.
I just debunked your science claim with an example above, but you seem to want to close your eyes to that.
I sent you many links showing the studies made to assess speed limit requirements. You're assuming your peers (other human beings) aren't doing their due diligence and that's a very poor argument. Just to recap 2 of the many metrics used: 1. The 85th percentile is one of the metrics used to assess compliance 2. Fatalities and injuries are used for assessing if the change is effective
I'm not assuming, as I said I have experience in this area. I choose not to disclose details in a public forum, but just accept that I have a little more insight to this than you're assuming. Sometimes the Engineers are listened to, a lot of the time they aren't.
A myth, by definition doesn't exist. Since you, me and everyone else use it everyday then it exists.
I think MS did more than just create CLI PC...
While I feel for the family, to say that he is not overweight shows just how much society's perception of being overweight has changed.
I remember teasing fat kids at school back in the 80s. In a school of 1800 kids there were about 4 fat kids, and by fat I mean not slim. These days it seems everyone is fat and you have to be morbidly obese to stand out. Even on TV where it was the domain of the slim and beautiful, it is now ok for people to be fat. You don't really notice how normalised it has become until you go away to a non-western country and time warp back to the 80's, then come back and look in shock at an entire nation of fat fucks.
That's because you were born 300 years to late.
In fact, in the US, increases in gun ownership and sales have correlated with decreases in murder rate.
I haven't seen the numbers, but I'd been willing to bet that crime is reducing overall due to increased prosperity in the developed world. The fact still remains, the US gun death rate is still of third world proportions, and just as much to do with the extreme gap between rich and poor which not as obvious as other developed nations.
Why do people always look to "gun-related" murder stats as though being murdered by a gun is somehow worse than being murdered by other means.
Because the argument is usually related to gun crime and gun control. Guns tend to allow more random and accidental murders, whereas other means require a bit more planning.
Higher, yes, but when you look at regions with analogous geographic sizes, populations, and cultural variations, the numbers don't express any ludicrously high differences.
Europe is far more varied than the US. You're including countries like Russia and the Ukraine which are at war. Hardly a fair comparison, it'd be like including Mexico in the US figures. Even then, with your figures the US is still over 50% higher.
When you compare the developed nations of Western Europe with the US, the numbers are not even close.
I was taught that a wounded animal is more dangerous than one that is not. There are people who are greatly offended (wounded) by the mockery of their strongly held beliefs. Why keep poking them with a stick and acting surprised when they strike back?
Yeah we should just submit to their demands. It's worth noting there's about 1.2 billion Muslims on this planet, most of whom didn't give the Mohammed drawings a second thought (well other than, hey that's disrespectful - what's for lunch today?). The only people getting upset are extremists, and they will always find a reason to be angry. The best path is to keep repeating these exercises until the extremists wake up and think hey this isn't so bad after all - whats for lunch? It's quite hard to stay angry for long periods of time. If you can normalise the object of anger, and demonstrate it isn't such a big deal after all, you find it hard for extremists to recruit for their cause. ( Think racism, homophobia etc all had lots of angry people against it that have now mostly evaporated when they realised the sky didn't fall on their heads)
Because you're from Texas and your education system isn't very good?
Yes, that explains why far more people are shot in Europe compared to the US. Oh wait...
I just looked this up for the first and laughed out loud. What the fuck are police doing dressing up like they're commandos? They even went as far as full face paint? Who are they hiding from? What a bunch of dickheads...
Texas is almost entirely desert, FYI.
And? Police are supposed to be visible, camouflage simply makes no sense unless you're an army wannabe and want to play GI Joe with your mates.
Only if you discard the time dimension. Christians spent hundreds of years imposing terrorism on the world. Just because their religion is a few hundred years older and hence a little more mature these days doesn't mean it didn't happen. Islam is merely going through the same growing pains that Christianity went through a during the inquisition and witch hunt days.
Yes, that includes Atheists. Just because they don't believe in God doesn't mean they don't believe in a shared mythos.
That's exactly what is means. Atheism is simply a lack of belief, so trying impose a belief structure on it makes no sense.
If you believe Fiat currency is a myth then please send me all your money. Talk is cheap...
Really?
Yes Really
Or do you want to ignore the fact of the low murder rate in easy to legally get a gun Plano, Texas (.4 per 100,000) and the highest murder rate in the hard to legally get a gun city of Detroit (54.6 per 100,000)?
Gun laws are state-wide aren't they? And last I checked people are able to move between towns without any sort of border control. Seems awfully selective to chose one town to demonstrate a point.
Using you own example, Texas has a gun death rate 3.2 per 100,000 which is still 13 times higher than the UK.
I'm afraid such crimes are not uniformly distributed across the country as your stats attempt to portray, and if you exclude a few notable locations which disproportionally have rather high numbers, the national average begins to drop quickly.
Yeah but everyone can say that. Take the mean streets of the London's East End out and things look better there too. The example of law must be demonstrated using the political boundary, not cherry picking areas that suit. The lowest gun death state in the US is Vermont which is still 20% higher than the UK. And pretty much higher than the top 30 countries in the world. In no case does more guns mean less guns deaths. In fact the opposite is generally true
What utter horseshit. what if you're poor and can't afford the safer area? You can't defend yourself because you work a menial job, or went into bankruptcy after a major medical condition. Guns are the great equalizer and everyone deserves to have them and defend themselves.
No the great equaliser is creating a society where you don't need weapons to get by, you know like all the places in the world that have higher standards of living than the US: http://www.businessinsider.com...
Please enlighten me as to which shining new law that doesn't currently exist would stop the next senseless gun death. Exactly which law including banning firearms will keep them out of the hands of criminals. Please feel free to succeed where countless politicians and anti-gun lobbyists have failed.
Perhaps you should look outside the US where every country in the western world has stricter gun control laws AND much less gun deaths? The success pattern is quite clear.
I'm not against guns, I grew up in a rural community where guns were tools used by people to perform a task (hunt wild animals and euthanise injured stock). The issue is more than just guns or no guns, but the US seems to have developed a "gun culture" which has leeched into the national psyche. Guns seem to be primarily treated as weapons and security blankets. That needs to be fixed before any effective regulation can be brought into place.